As litter for use in animal bedding, various absorbent and absorbent mixture compositions, have been used in the past. Such materials quite often have a limited degree of odor controlling activity. This depends on the number and condition of the animals, and the extent of use of the litter. In the past the deodorizing effect is soon exhausted. For this reason, many products have been developed and some sold to help eliminate these animal excreta odors. These additives extend the useful life span of the litter filler or absorbent medium. Most of these products are primarily composed of inexpensive buffering agents such as sodium bicarbonate, calcium bicarbonate and similar double salts of metals. But, even with these additives, their ability to control and absorb the odors is still limited, and the effect is not able to be sustained for great lengths of time.
Other approaches have been to combine these odor buffers with fragrant esters to cover or mask this so called "cat box odor". Even this masking approach only extends the odor controlling effect a minor time amount (such as a day), and sometimes with the negative effect, such as the animal resisting using the litter because the fragrance while pleasant to humans is offensive to the animal. This offensiveness to the animal often results in animal indiscretions. Certain animals, specially some cats perceive the fragrances as offensive.
Examples of some of the above attempts at deodorizing additives are found embodied in U.S. patents, numbered;
a. U.S. Pat. No. 4,641,605 discloses the use of sodium or ammonium persulfate as the oxidizing deodorant.
b. U.S. Pat. No. 4,607,594 discloses an animal litter utilizing what are now common buffering agents such as carbonates and bi-carbonates.
c. U.S. Pat. No. 3,921,581 uses as the principal deodorant a fragrant masking aroma which is slowly released over a limited time.
d. U.S. Pat. No. 3,735,734 discloses the use of chlorophyll as the major deodorant agent.
e. U.S. Pat. No. 3,675,625 incorporates a fragrance to counteract the nature produced odors.
Close approach to the present inventive function and proposed composition and product was not observed in the above cited references. Accordingly, the patents cited above and their patents of reference should be considered as being of general interest and illustrative of the scope of the available art. None, appear to be close; in function, composition or product produced thereby, to the herein proposed inventive concept.
Many other similar products are sold that have apparently no patent protection. One example of this is a product called "Glade Litter Fresh", which is an example of a mixture of buffering agents (calcium carbonate) and masking fragrances. Most of these products or others like them, are incapable of producing long lasting odor control. Rarely do they significantly increase the useful life expectancy of the litter medium with which they are paired. Again the aromas they produce are perceived as unpleasant by the subject animal.
It is the object of the present invention to provide profound odor suppression without the addition of masking fragrances that might be disconcerting or disturbing to the subject animal. Another object of this invention is to provide not only a deodorant litter but one that is of the proper pH range to promote the health of the animal. Test of the animals that are in contact with the litter over a period of 6 months show no adverse effects. On the contrary the tests show that the additive disclosed herein is particularly bactericidal for anaerobic bacteria. The anaerobic bacteria are generally regarded as the more dangerous of the bacteria divisions. It is perceived that the embodiment of this invention produces a material additive that is functionally compatible with a wide variety animal litters such as; clay based litters, cellulosic litters, wood particles, particulate corn cob, shredded news print or news paper.